The Sun. — London, England, 1838-12-25 00:00:00

that in fact the whole proceeding did not take up more than two minutes. Had any mention been made of a pro mise of the Charity, Mr. Visger and Mr. Saunders being both Trustees, would naturally have had their atten tion drawn to it ; but they would declare that no such thing could have taken place. His Learned Friend would no doubt ask with what motive he brought these poor beings from Bristol into that Court ? It was unnecessary to do so, for the matter was so plain that he (Mr. C.) would not answer the question. The question for them to try was, whether the woman had been guilty of wilful and corrupt per jury; and after hearing his evidence he apprehended the Jury would have not a shadow of a doubt resting on their minds. He would not then detain them any longer. Should his Learned Friend call any witnesses, it would be his duty to address them again ; if not, his evidence would be so clear that the Jury would have an easy, though a painful duty to perform. William Harper Gear, the clerk to the prosecutor's soli citor, produced an office copy of the return made from Bris tol at the late election. Mr. James Gunn, a clerk in the Journal Office of the House of Commons, produced a petition which was pre sented on the 21st November, 1837, against Mr. Berkeley's return. It was the petition of Henry Bushe and others, elec tors of Bristol. It was sent before a Committee. Mr. Gear produced an office and examined copy of the Master's Report appointing trustees for the charities in Bristol. It was confirmed by the Lord Chancellor. Amongst the trustees were the names of Mr. Carlisle, Mr. Visgerr, and Mr. Saunders. Mr. Thomas Fenner was Committee Clerk in the Bristol Election Committee. He was present at the time Mrs. Virrier was examined, and he administered the oath to her. There was a short-hand writer present ; his name was Snell. The Committee did not adjourn on the conclusion of Mrs. Virrier's examination. Other witnesses were examined on the 20th. Mr. THESIGER—It is no use pursuing this line of exa mination. I admit that I, exercising what I thought a sound discretion, withdrew from the Committee. There were eight to three against me on the Committee, and I abandoned the petition. The petition was then put in and read. Mr. THESIGER submitted that there was a variance be tween the petition and the record. The LEARNED JUDGE said it did not matter, as he had power to amend. Mr. Snell, the short-hand writer, was then put into the box. Before he read his notes, he was cross-examined by Mr. Thesiger. He said other witnesses than Mrs. Virrier were examined as to the fact of the promise of the 61. There was a long examination by the Committee, but he had no notes to show him which Members put the ques tions. To the best of his recollection, the greater number of them were put by Mr. Sergeant Ball, now the Attorney- General for Ireland ; other Members put questions, but the greater number were put by the Sergeant. Mr. Snell then proceeded to read over his notes of the evidence given by Mrs. Virrier before the Committee. Mr. Fenner, examined by Mr. CHAMBERS—You are, I believe, one of the Committee Clerks of the House of Commons ?—I am. Was the Committee sworn?—lt was. When and where? On the 15th of February in the House of Commons. Mr. THESIGER—Is that all the evidence you bring for ward as to the appointment of the Committee ? Mr. CHAMBERS—No ; we call Mr. William Lee. Mr. CROWDER—I want to know what point you in tend to make upon that ? Mr. THESIGER—No ; I shall not tell you what point I intend to make ; I shall leave you to make out your own case. Mr. Wm. Lee was then called, and read the journals of the 21st November, 1837, on which day the petition was presented against Mr. Berkeley's return, and was ordered to be taken into consideration on the sth December. Lord DENMAN—That order was discharged, and another day appointed, I suppose? Mr. Lee—Yes. Mr. CHAMFERS.—What was the day of the ballot, Mr. Lee ? Witness.—The 15th of February. Did it take place ? It did. There are two elections for that day—the Sligo and the Bristol. The House was counted, and there being upwards of 350 Members present, counsel were called in in the Sligo petition ; aad they being ordered to withdraw, the Bristol was then called on. The Clerk afterwards brought in the reduced list, and the Members were sworn in the House of Commons. Mr. Chalmers, the Clerk of Election Committees in the House of Commons, produced the reduced list. It was his duty to attend what was called "the strike." He did so when the Bristol Election Petition was balloted for. The list now produced was the list so reduced. That list be (witness) carried into the House ; it was laid upon the table, and the Members were called up and sworn. Mr. Berkeley sworn—Examined by Mr. CROWDER— I believe, Mr. Berkeley, you are one of the Members for the city of Bristol ?—I am. When first did you become a candidate for the represen tation of the city of Bristol ? I arrived the city, I think, on the morning of the sth of July, and then I became in immediate communication with the Liberal Association. I believe you had not been in Bristol before that day ? Not for many years. You began your canvass, I believe, on that day or the folloiving ? I commenced it on the 6th. You say you were put in communication with the Libe ral Associatiou. Did you commence your canvass with acy other persons? W.th various members of the Association and others. Can you tell us the names of the gentlemen that accom panied you ? There were Mr. Cunninghame, Mr. George E. Saun ders, Mr. H. Visger, Mr. Somerton, Mr. Rankin, and there were others ; but I don't think I could name them. At what time of the day did you begin your canvass ? I shot tid think nearly eleven o'clock. Did you In the course of the day get to the Adam and Eve-passage ? Yes, we did some time afterwards. About what time ? That I cannot exactly say ; but I know it was after lun cheon. It's a large constituency ? Yes, I believe nominally about 9,000. When ;•ou arrived at the Adam and Eve-passage, do you recollect hoc, you were walking ? Yes, with Mr. H. Visger. I perceive you are lame, and walk with a stick ? Yes. When walking through the passage, had you Mr. Vis ger's lea arm ? I think I had ; Mr. Carlisle was also with me. Mr. Cunninghame had quitted us previously, to go to his count ing -house. When you came to the door of Virrier's house was it open or shut? Mrs. Virrier appeared to be at the entrance into the Adam and Eve-passage, which goes from \Vine-street through to another street. You say you saw Mrs. Virrier at the door ? Yes, the outer door of her house. How was Mr. Carlisle standing, then, with respect to you anal Mr. Visger ? Mr. Carlisle spoke first ; I came up to the door with Mr. Visger. Mr. Carlisle was there, and appeared to have an acquaintance with the woman. We were all three close together ; we formed a kind of circle. Now state what you first heard pass between Mrs. Vir rier and any of your party. Mr. Carlisle asked Mrs. Virrier whether Mr. Virrier was at home ?to which she replied in the negative. He then asked her for whom her husband intended to vote at the ensuing election, and I think he said, pointing to me, this is tie gentleman who is a candidate. Mrs. Virrier replied, my husband intends to Note one and one, by which he will avoid giving offence to both parties. I think I then said, lam much obliged to you. Mr. Carlisle then said, Well, if he does, he will act as a wise man. Had you any cards with you ? I canvassed with two species of cards ; a large sort, with the colour of the party, pink, with my name on it in large letters, and likewise my own personal cards, visiting cards ; and in case a voter was not at home I generally left my personal card, stating my address, and perhap s a few of the other larger cards for the children to put on the chimney-piece. Do you recollect what was said next, either by yourself or Mr. Carlisle, after he had said he would be a wise man if lie did ? Nothing, I believe. Took Mr. Carlisle's arm, and hook hands with Mrs. Virrier. When you shook hands with her, I ask you, upon your oath, whether you said anything to her, and what ? I said I was very much obliged to her—simply, the compliment—and I said " Good day," perhaps. Did you, upon your oath, put anything—a sovereign— into that woman's hand ? Upon my oath, decidedly not. Had you a sovereign there Certainly not. Did you put anything into her hand ? To the best of my recollection, certainly not. If I had, it would have been my card. My recollection does not serve me whether I put my card into her hand or not. Did you say anything to her in a low voice—a whisper? Certainly not. Was what passed between Mr. Carlisle and Mrs. Virrier udible ? Very; Mr. Carlisle speaks particularly clear—very loudly. Did he upon that occasion speak in his ordinary tone ? Yes ; I heard every word he said. Then Sir, I ask you, whether Mr. Carlisle said he would act like a sensible man, and I will give him the 6/. at Christmas ? Certainly not. Did Mr. Carlisle say anything about 6/., or Christmas, or anything of that sort ? Nothing of the sort. F7 4 ,1?inl Did any body in your hearing say anything about the 6/. ? Certainly not. Or about any sum of money ? Decidedly not. Were you during the time you were at Mr. Virrier's door in such a situation that you might Hve heard what Mr. Carlisle said ? Certainly. We continued together till we left the door. I don't think that Mr. Carlisle was at any time further from me than I am from you. How long do you suppose you was there ? I should think the whole might be included in three minutes. Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER—I went abroad for six or seven years for the benefit of my health. A lady accompanied me. She had been married, but lam not able to say that she was married at that time. She was not married to me, and I do not know whether her husband was living then or not. She had been with me about two years before I went abroad. She returned with me. She now resides in a house of her own. I certainly see her occasionally. I was invited to Bristol by the Liberal Association, and individuals of that Association acted for me. I presume I had a Committee, but I cannot state on my oath that I had, for I never saw one. A deputation from the Liberal Association waited on me, and they managed the election. I could name four or five members of that Association who were Charity Trustees. Mr. Visger and Mr. Carlisle were members. Mr. Cunningham was President, and Mr. G. H. Saun ders Vice-President. I began my canvass on the 6th of July. The gentlemen who accompanied me frequently carried with them tracts, or pamphlets, which they gave to the electors. I saw the tracts, and approved of them. I do not know how many were printed, but I should say thousands. Some of the electors have spoken to me about the Charities, and I have replied. I have not, to my knowledge, spoken to them about the Charities without them having spoken to me. Are you prepared to swear that you never did, in the course of your canvass, mention the 6/. charity at Christmas ?—I should not like to swear it at all, but I cannot swear that I did. I have no recollection of such an occurrence, otherwise I would swear it. Are you prepared to swear that the persons who ac companied you in your canvass, in your presence did not mention the Charities?—They have very frequently re ferred to the tracts, and pointed out that those charities which had been formerly used for political purposes were now no longer so. That is not quite an answer to my question. I must have an answer distinctly. Are you prepared to swear that the gentlemen who accompanied you did not, in your presence, mention the 61. Charity at Christmas ?—ln the way I have mentioned. Are you prepared to swear they have not in any other way ?—I am. Lord DENMAN—You are prepared to state that ? Yes ; roundly and broadly ; and I would state further, that if they had done so— Mr. THESIGER—You cannot state that. You have spoken to the electors about the Charities ?—I said the charities would be disposed of according to merit. Whether the merits were blue or any other way ?—Dis tinctly, not politically. That has not happened a hundred times ; but I will not swear to fifty. You knew nothing of Virrier before this ?—I r ever heard the man's name mentioned, except by Mr. Visger, in approaching the spot. The Adam and Eve-passage may be four or five yards wide. The door of Virrier's house opens upon the passage. I saw nothing within the door way but Mrs. Virrier. I canvassed a vast number of per sons in the course of the day, but can't recollect what passed at every place. It required some particular object to fix such an idea in my mind. There was nothing parti cular in what passed at Virrier's, unless that it referred to certain information which I had received from Mr. Visger, touching certain voters in Bristol, which he exemplified by Virrier. Then there was nothing particular in the interview be tween you and Mrs. Virrier? On the contrary ; I should say she was extremely par ticular ; she is a sort of person that one can't easily mistake. I saw nobody else there besides the canvassing party and Mrs. Virrier. During the whole of the time I was with Mr. Visger, except when I disengaged my arm. I can't tell whether Mr. Carlisle had shifted ground or not. Do you happen to know the expenses of the election? I do not. Did you provide any funds ? I was the means of providing some part of the funds. The medium ? I won't cavil with you about the expression ; I have no hesitation in saying that part of the sum came from my family, for the necessary expenses of the election. How much was that—l,sool.? I rather think it was more. That came from Berkeley Castle ? Yes. From Lord Segrave : how much more than 1,500/. ? There was an additional sum, but I can't say how much. Do you mean to say that you defrayed out of the monies that were provided all the expenses ? As far as I know, the expenses were defrayed so. Do you know the amount of the expenses yourself ? I cannot speak positively to them. Can you state comparatively ? I have stated that was the sum, beyond which I was not prepared to go. That is, you were liable to that extent, and all the ex penses beyond were to be provided from another source ? If any existed. And if that existed you don't know ? I do not. Do you pay the expenses of the prosecution ? Certainly, I shall. With your own funds ? With no other funds that I know of. Is there nobody answerable to save you harmless from these expenses ? No, there is not ; it is a matter of feeling on my own part bringing this indictment, and I am answerable for it. Re-examined.—l had nothing further to do with the Liberal Association than to receive the assistance of th ese gentlemen. I do not recollect at what period the tracts were first issued ; certainly not within the first two or three days. You said there was something particular in Mrs.Virrier ? Her personal appearance was very particular ; she had either only one eye, or else an extraordinary obliquity of vision. It was her personal appearance that struck me as remarkable ; and I likewise referred to certain conversation passing around me—it was some joke. Mr. Harman Visger examined by Mr. ADOLPHUS.—I am a merchant at Bristol, a town councillor, and one of the charity trustees. One of the charities is called Pelloquin's, which is usually distributed about Christmas. The amount is about 61. each to fifty persons. I accompanied Mr. Berkeley on his canvass. He walked with a stick, and generally took the arm of some friend. On the day in ques tion he took the arm of Mr. Cunningham in the morning, and part of the day he took !nine. We went in the course of the day to Adam and Eve-passage, leading froni Wine street to Maryport-street. The passage is a narrow one. Virrier's house is in the widest part of it. I think we got there about three o'clock. Mr. Berkeley had then hold of my arm. The outer door of the house, I think, was open. Mr. Berkeley solicited Mrs. Virrier for her husband's vote, stating that he hoped he would give one. Her reply was, that her husband was going to vote one and one. Did Mr. Carlisle say anything ? I can't sufficiently divest my mind of what I have heard, to say specifically whether he did or not. I think he said that was right, or something of that kind. Did he say to Mrs. Virrier, or any one else, one word about the charities 't —Ho did not. Did he say that if her husband voted one and one, he should have 61. at Christmas ?—He did not. Did you hear him say, at any time, that Mr. Virrier should certainly have 6/. at Christmas?—No, never. While Mr. Berkeley was there, did you see anything prss between him and Mrs. Virrier ?—I saw him shake hands with her. He left hold of my arm, and changed his stick from one hand to the other, to enable him to do so. Did he put his hand into his pocket, or any place about him, whatever ?—I did not see him. can't say positively have done so, without your seeing him ?—I nsitivelv whether he might or not. Did h e at • own party time, h during your being there, whisper to her at all people, and p youriDid'iyAoaluenrwd.see any other r person there except Mrs. Virrier tsoa d yt id hat n yeel e—l th o ec t if . t„Vcitrr?i—ersNow.ere deserving hoped they would have the money at no_ forget them Christmas, otrhil:aeanrryllt in You say such a thing ?—No. Did any one of Did Mr. Carlisle, at anytime, say he had the power, and he wound t E - - s i 1• 4 1 : E o R . CrOSS,eXarnined by Mr. anythingTn Carlisle said—Do you recollect whether Mr. l , or not ?—I can't suffi ciently divest myse lf of what - • 1 " v o heard • ()rsince, to say whether it was an origina. recollection Lord DENMAN —Do y ou recd,._ whether s any thing, or not ?—Having heard th ings sined 2 cant I said say whether he made an immaterial observation or Tanything hat is not the question ; did he say I'ot. ? — I am not sure whether he said anything or not. By Mr. THESICER—I am a member of the Liberal Association, and acted with Mr. Berkeley at the election. Messrs. Powell, Harwood, Canning, Visger, Castle, Saun ders, and several other trustees, are also members. Lord DENMAN—How many are there altogether ? Mr. THESIGIR—There are twenty-one, and seventeen are members of the Association ; there are only four who are not. Cross-examination continued—l distributed some tracts, but I think not a thousand. I paid Mr. Somerton's account. When distributing the tracts I did not talk to the electors about the charities, except when spoken to about them, and then only o❑ about three occasions. I think Mr. Berkeley must have been present. It was in the course of the canvass. I don't recollect seeing any body look into Mrs. Virrier's window on going away. I can't swear whether I did or not. Will you swear that you did not, in looking through the window, see persons inside ?—I don't recollect see ing any one. I'll swear that I believe I did not. Did you not see Sarah Ann Hayward there ?—I have no recollection of seeing any one there. Re-examined--You were asked about talking to some of the electors on the subject of the charities : what did did those electors say that induced you to con verse ?—They said something that induced me to expect they considered voting would be a recommendation to the charity, and I undeceived them immediately. How undeceived them ?—I said we distributed the charity according to the merits of the case, and not with any political view whatever. That is the answer I re turned in every case. Did you hear any one say anything differently ?-- No one whatever. Mr. Thomas Carlisle examined by Mr. CHAMBERS-- I am a haberdasher and mercer at Bristol. lam also a member of the Corporation, and a trustee of the cha rities. I recollect going with Mr. Berkeley on the 6th of July, late in the afternoon, to Adam and Eve-passage. Mr. Somerton, Mr. Visger, Mr. G. H. Saunders, Mr. T. R. Saunders, Mr. Thomas Wrighten and Mr. Miller were also there. I have not seen Mr. Miller for some months. On coming up to the door we saw Mrs. Virrier. Did you and Mr. Somerton go into the house ?--Only on the threshold of the door. She was in a small space, the lobby of the house. As far as you can recollect, tell me what took place upon your going up ?—lmmediately when we got up I asked, "Is Virrier within ?" and, if I recollect right, she almost anticipated what I was going to say, by remarking, " It is all right gentlemen, Vir- Her will vote one and one." Mr. Berkeley had come up by this time. I said, " this is Mr. Berkeley, and we have come to ask Virrier's vote for him." Her answer was, "He intends to vote one and one." I said if he does that, lie will be a sensible man, situated as he is. Did you hear anything that Mr. Berkeley said, or see any thing that he did ?—He thankedher,and I think shooks hands with her, and, as he had done in the course of the day where we had not found the party at home, he left his private card, and I gave one of the canvassing cards at the same time. When Mr. Berkeley shook hands with her, was your eye upon him ?—Oh, yes. Could he, without your seeing him, have given her a so vereign ?—I should think it utterly impossible. Did he address her in a whisper or a low tone of voice ? I believe he said, " Deliver this to Mr. Virrier, and say lam much obliged to him." After Mr. Berkeley had shook hands with her, did any of you remain, or did you go away ?—We all went away im mediately. Was any sovereign given ?—No, certainly not. Did you say you would give Virrier 6/. at Christmas, or any sum of money ? Certainly not : in fact, she seemed in as great a hurry to promise the vote as we were to ask it. Did you say that you would not forget—that it was in your power to do so ?—No, nothing of the kind. Did you hear Mr. Berkeley say anything about giving her anything ?—No. certainly he did not. If any thing of the kind had passed, were you near enough to hear, and must you have heard it?—Oh, yes ; we were all in a line on the threshold of the door How long do you suppose this interview lasted ?. should say two or three minutes, not exceeding three, I am positive. Had you known Mrs. Virrier before ?—I had the Christ mas previous to that. How was it you came to know her ?—Part of my duty as charity trustee. Mr. THESIGER—Are we to go into that ? Lord DErlstaN—You had known her petitioning before for the charity ?—I had. Mr. CROWDER—She said he had promised her six months before. Mr. THESIGER—We come here to meet a charge of perjury. The indictment only states the allegation of what was done at the time of canvassing. Lord DENMAN—I don't see the object of it. Mr. CaownEa---It was stated that she had been pro mised 6/., and a good deal of the examination before the Committee was as to the promise made by Mr. Carlisle. I was going to ask Mr. Carlisle, whether, when the peti tion of 1836 was rejected, because Virrier had had the money previously, he afterwards said anything about the 6/. for the purpose of meeting any observation which my Learned Friend might make, to exclude any presumption against us for not going into the matter. Lord DENMAN—You must confine yourself within some limits. Ido not see that it is necessary to go into these particulars. Cross-examined by Mr. THEszcER—I was one that was elected on the Committee, at a general meeting of the citi zens. Mr. Cunningham was Chairman of that Committee. He is also Chairman of the Charity Trustees, and Chair man of the Liberal Association. I read most of the tracts that were circulated, but I don't think I eistributed one. I saw a great number distributed. Perhaps there were not so many in my district as in others. There are fewer free men there. Pelloquin's charity is confined to freemen only. I don't recollect any one looking through Virrier's window. Re-examined.—I had not been a Charity trustee before 1836. I was appointed by the Lord Chancellor. William Henry Somerton examined by Mr. CROWDER —You are a printer at Bristol ?—I am. You are a member of the Liberal Association ?—I sub scribe to it. Did you accompany Mr. Berkeley on his canvass on the 6th July ?—I did. Were you with him when he went to Adam and Eve passage ?—Yes. Be so good as to state to the Jury how you went to the door of Mrs. Virrier's house in Adam and Eve•passage ? Who went first ?—Mr. Carlisle and myself went first a little in advance of the party. Mr. Carlisle called out in a loud voice, "Is Virrier at home ? Mrs. Virrier met. us on the threshold. Did you enter the door ?—We did not. At that instant the remainder of the party came up. How far had they been behind?—Two or three steps. Mr. Carlisle asked if Virrier was at home ?—Yes, and Mrs. Virrier said, "It is all right, Gentlemen. Virrier means to v•:e one and one. He has got friends on both sides, and won't offend anybody." What said any body to that?—Mr. Carlisle made some remark approving of what was said. I cannot remember the words, but it was tantamount to this, that he would act properly, or sensibly, or something of that sort. At that time Mr. Berkeley was close to you?—He was standing in front. Was anything said about Mr. Berkeley ?—I don't re collect. Was Mr. Berkeley known to her ?—He was introduced ; she was told this is Mr. Berkeley. I don't recollect by whom. Did Mr. Berkeley do or say anything when she said her husband would vote one and one ?—lt is probable that he thanked her, taking it as a promise. Did you see him shake hands with her can't say ; but I think he must have done so, for he shook hands wits almost all wh• promised him, or were friendly to his cause. Were you close by till you left ?—Close by. Did not Mr. Carlisle speak in a loud voice P—Suffi ciently loud for every person to hear. On that occasion did you hear him say that Virrier was a sensible man, and that he should have 61. at Christmas ? —There was nothing of the sort said. Are you quite sure ?—I did not hear anything of the kind. Were you near enough to hear if anything like that was said ?—I must have heard it if such an observation had passed. If you heard such a thing it must have struck you ?—lt certainly would. Did you hear him say I shall not forget you if it is in my power, and I will not forget it ?—There was not a word said after she had promised. Not a word about GI., or any sum of money. Did Mr. Berkeley say do not forget them, they are de serving people ?—Not a word of the kind. As you were close to Mr. Berkeley can you tell us if he whispered anything ?—I do not think he did. Cards were given, I believe ?—Yes, cards were given generally. Were they given on that occasion have no recollec tion that cards were given on that occasion. How long were you at the door ?—Two minutes — net exceeding that time. Did you retire with Mr. Carlisle ?—Yes, with him and Mr. Berkeley. Was Mr. Berkeley near you ?—I do not know his ex act position ; he and Mr. Carlisle and Mr. George Saunders were in front, but I cannot speak precisely as to his position. Cross-e;amined by Mr. THESIGEIt—You are the printer of the Bristol Mercury k-71 am the proprietor and printer. Were you employed to tracts' for (.4so.o?ution amon g the electors t— A es. THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 25, 1838, Can you tell how many you printed of all These tracts ? —What tracts do you mean ? Those relating to the charities ; there are four of them ? —[The tracts were here put into the witness's hands.] Now, you can tell us how many you printed ? Alto gether about 120,000. Who paid you for them?—Mr. Cunningham. The Chairman of Mr. Berkeley's Committee ? Yes. Just look at this Paper, and tell me if it is one of your Papers ?—Yes. You are the proprietor of that Paper am. Mr. THESIGER read the following paragraph :—" In the mean time we will leave these admitted facts to the good sense of the freemen, that 18 out of the 21 Charity Trus tees are good straightforward Liberals, and in the distribu tion of their trust funds they are sure not to reward a single Tory vote."—(A laugh.) Are you the author of that ? —I am not. Who is ?—My Lord, am Ito answer that question ? I am responsible for the article. Lord DENMAN—I don't think it is quite necessary. Mr. CROWDER—I have given my Learned Friend all the latitude he is fairly entitled to, but I submit the ques tion has nothing to do with the issue in this inquiry. Lord DENMAN—It might have a very important bearing if it could be traced to some of these witnesses. Mr. CaownErt—l admit that, my Lord. Lord DENMAN—Mr. Thesiger, you will understand the line I have drawn ? Mr. THEstuEu—Certainly, my Lord. I take it for granted Mr. Berkeley is not the author P—No. Was Mr. Harman Visger the author ?—No. Was Mr. Carlisle ?—He was not. Was Mr. Saunders ?—No. Mr. CROWDER—There are two Mr. Saunders. Mr. THESIGER-4 thank my Learned Friend. Was the other Mr. Saunders ?—Neither of them. Was Mr. Cunningham ?—No, Sir How much did you receive for your printing account ? —My printing account included advertising not only in the Mercury, but also in all the other Bristol papers, with the exception of some for advertisements ; and for advertising and printing in the whole it was about 1201., a few pounds more or less. Mr. TIIESIGER—Does your Lordship think I am en titled to ask whether this was written by any of the Cha rity Trustees? Lord DENMAN-4 rather think not. These matters, with respect to all these persons, are entirely behind their backs. I understand you not to be able to swear precisely to the expressions used by Mr. Carlisle ?—Not to the words but to the import. They were tantamount to what I have stated. You were near enough to hear them ?—Certainly. He said, then he will act like a sensible man. I cannot state positively the words, but they were to that effect. That was all that passed ?—All, to the best of my recol lection. Did you see any other persons there ?--I did. I don't mean canvassing, but in the house ?—I saw a young woman behind Mrs. Virrier, her daughter ; and I be lieve there was another female older, who was behind her again. lam not quite positive as to the third female. You saw the daughter ?—Yes. Clearly ?—Yes. Where were you standing during the whole time this passed.—ln front of the street door. Who was before you ?—No person stood between me and Mrs. Virrier. We spread ourselves out in front of the door. Who were with you ?—Mr. Berkeley, Mr. G. E. Saun ders, Mr. Thomas R. Saunders, and Mr. Carlisle. You were all close to the door ?—Yes. Were those persons, the females, within the room ?—ln the passage. I think one of them was partly in the pas sage, and partly in the room. So that they were obvious to any body ?—A person standing, and looking where I was, could see them easily. In the position you stood, you saw them plainly ?—Yes. Could the other parties, from where they stood, have seen them ?—lf they were looking in the same direction as my self, they could have seen them very well. Were you nearer the passage than any of them ?—I don't think I was. Was any body nearer than you ?—I can't say as to their relative position. Re-examined by Mr. CROWDER—We stood in a semi circle round the door. I know the position of the riom, having been at Virrier's on business. I know it from that circumstance better than the other parties. I understood one of the females to be the daughter of Mrs. Virrier. I think she stood behind her mother. We left in about two minutes. I cannot say when these tracts were first pub lished. They were not issued certainly before the 12th of July. I was blamed by the trustees for publishing that paragraph. Mr. THESIGER objected to that evidence. His Learned Friend would not allow him to ask who wrote it. Lord DENMAN did not think it evidence at all. It fur nished an observation with regard to what passed at the time. Thomas Rankin examined by Mr. ADOLPHUS—I am a wine merchant at Bristol. I accompanied Mr. Berkeley in his canvass on the 6th of July. I was at Adam and Eves pasage when we called upon Virrier ; we were there about two minutes. Mr. Carlisle said to Mrs. Virrier that her husband would act like a sensible man by voting as she had stated he intended to do—that was, one and one. I heard no other observation. Mr. Berkeley thanked her. I heard him say nothing more. He shook hands with her. I should say he had nothing in his hands when he shook hands with her ; I saw his hand, I saw nothing in it ; there could no t, I t hi n k , b e a sovereign wrapped up in paper in it. I must have seen it if there had been. He spoke in his usual tone, as did also Mr. Carlisle. Mr. Carlisle said nothing about giving her husband 61. at Christmas. Mr. Berkeley did not say they were deserving people. I knew Mr. Miller ; I believe he is in South Americ a at present. I know there is no means of getting at him now, for the purposes of this trial. Every person present might have heard what passed while we were there. Cross-examined by Mr. THEsIGER—I was standing with Mr. G. Saunders. I saw into the passage, but saw no person but Mrs. Virrier. Mr. Berkeley was on my left. I don't think he turned in any way when shaking hands. I remember some of the party looking through the window. lam sure it was not Mr. Visger, but I don't know who it was. I did not look in myself. George E. Saunders, examined by Mr. CHAMBERS—I reside at B r i stol, I am a Magistrate, a Town Councillor, and a l so a Charity Trustee. I accompanied the canvass ing sparty iti l who, on the Gth J u l y . I was at Ad am and Eve passage wascan't o told, was le f e r all .s the Virrier. conversation. e d I saw a woman, nothing said by Mr. Carlisle, of giving 61. to Virrier at Christmas. I think it impossible but I must have heard it from the usual tone of Mr. Carlisle's voice. All that was said by him was in his usual loud tone. I saw Mr. Ber keley shaking hands with the voters generally. I did not see him whisper io Mrs. Virrier, or any person during the canvass. The interview was only a minute or two. Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER—I don't recollect what Mr. Carlisle or Mr. Berkeley said. All I know was, we were promised a vote there. lam a member of the Liberal Association. lam not a member of the Bristol Political Union. I was asked to be President, but at once declined having any thing to do with it. Never had any communication with it. I have seen a great many tracts like this during the election. I never saw the manuscript of any of them. I may have distributed some of them. I don't know whether I distributed any in Patterson's-yard or not. Mr. Cunningham was with me there, but I can't say whether I distributed them or not. I read a great many of these tracts. Re-examined--I don't know where they were distributed, Thoma s Richard Saunders examined by Mr. CROWDER— I am a merchant at Bristol, and a member of the corpora tion. I accompanied Mr. Berkeley on his canvass at Adam and Eve-passage. I did not call at Mrs. Virrier's house, but was in the passage five or six yards from the door. The party lounging, after the only n remained flaytaigufees of wminutes.theday. I I di il was no t tired pay much and attention to what was going on. The case for th e p rosecu tion here closed. 1 Mr:TIIE:ICEa addressed the Jury for th e d e f en d ant. he was there to defend a person in an humble s t a ti on He rose with feelings of very considerable aux i e t y , b ecause be t o fi x t h at c h arge p of life, from a most serious charge that had bee n p re f erre d against her. And he could not help thinking, th a t if t h e res o u n it he o r f theinquirty should er ruin . of . herself and her family. u i t t li t i n s us dtabye's utter He (lid not on that account ask of the j ury any feeling of com passion in her favour. Nor did lie desire th a t th ey should not do complete justice w i t h out reference to the condition of the parties ; but it might b e necessary, i n order that they might be fully impressed w ith t h e import ance of the duty they had to dischar ge, to pay more than ordinary attention to the circum stances of that mo s t extra ordinary case, and to follow out the observations which he was called upon shortly to present to their consideration. He complained of the cou rse pursu e d b y hi s L earned Friend for the prosecution, because he had had unfor tunately some considered that it e:!periewasnce the in bounthese cases, an d h e h a d always d en -. duty of every gentle man to whom was entrusted the imp ortant o ffi ce of 'public prosecutor, at all events, to abstain from any virulence of expression. and anything calculated to add to the weight of the charge the party , . had to s.ustain. Y et , to hi s aston i s h. went, his Learned i.riend, after carefully scrutini‘ing the long examination that took place before the Committee, s p o k e o f that poor woman as a shuffling, prevaricating, quibbling woman, and not satisfied with calling her 4 wretch, denounced her as utterly unworthy the at tention of a Jury. Did they belieye that came from his Pearge4 Frinad boo. ? vg. liis Lean:led •! " ,' : ' Friend had feelings of honour, and knew what ought to be done on occasions like the present. This was a question of character ; and he would say that the cha racter of the party accused was as dear and valuable to her as that of the accuser. Nay, in one sense of the word he might be allowed to say it was infinitely dearer and more valuable, because it was almost essential to her existence ; butthey did find that therewere persons in a higher condition of life who unfortunately could exist and could maintain a station in the world without its being necessary for that existence that they should possess character. In opening the case, his Learned Friend had advertedto the course of examination that had taken place, and on that he had founded a great number of obser vations. He had told them that the greater part of the examination to which he had directed their attention was an examination not by Counsel, but by the Committee it self, for the purpose of investigating the case. He (Mr. Thesiger) admitted that it was a most important duty which a Judge had to perform in all the tribunals of this country, frequently to put questions for the purpose of eliciting the truth, which one party could not and the other party dare not put, and even in the course of the present day, they had witnessed the Noble Lord who presided putting most important ques. tions for that purpose. It was therefore a most essential and important duty in a Judge, that on various occasions he should put those questions to the witnesses which Coun sel on either side might, for reasons of their own, abstain from putting. Because the Counsel on each side had one duty to perform —to regard the interests of their respective clients only, while the Judge only regarded the interests of justice. The Jury, also, should be only desirous to ascer tain the truth—they had no partial or prejudiced view, as the advocates necessarily had ; and from the position they were placed in, they frequently put searching and important questions, by which the truth would be more satisfactorily ascerta;ned. If he had found that on the present occasion the anxiety of the Committee, to which his Learned Friend had referred, was merely occasioned by a desire to elicit the truth, he would have passed it over without observa tion ; but he did feel himself challenged by his Learned Friend to call their attention to the peculiarity of that examination, and then to ask them if even those of the firmest and steadiest minds could stand the ordeal of the severe scrutiny to which that poor woman was exposed by a Member of that Commit tee. Would not any one have faultered occasionally and perhaps have forgotten what they had said on a previous oc casion. The reading of that examination had occupied 55 minutes, and 25 of these were consumed by the examination, cross-examination, and re-examination of the Couns e l on citheir side, but hat more than half of the inquiry was in stituted by a particular leading Member of the Committee ; who with all the zeal and experience of an advocate, coupled with all the authority of a judge, contrived to harrass and torture that unhappy woman for a period of at least three or four hours, assuming facts in order to trap her, endeavour ing to twist her evidence, until at length he wrung from her that expressions—" I am not to be brow-beat in this way." That simple expression of a person exposed to the torture of such an examination for the period he had mentioned, would describe the mode of examination that had taken place. He agreed with his Learned Friend that they were labouring under the disadvantage of merely hearing the ex amination read—they _ had not seen it, but he would say that from the mode in which the examination was conducted it was utterly impossible for any firmness of mind to resist the ingenuity, he had almost said the malicious ingenuity, applied to that inquiry by the person to whom allusion had been made. It was not the examination of a Member un used in legal investigation, it was that of a most acute and experienced advocate, a gentleman who was Attorney- General for Ireland, to which station he had been elevated since that inquiry had taken place. His friend had a perfect right to state that counsel for the petitioners did, on the third day, exercise a discretion with respect to continuing the inquiry. He felt there was no chance of success from the mode in which the inquiry was conducted, that it was useless to heap up expenses, and protract that which was utterly hopeless in the result, and therefore he did exercise his discretion in retiring from such a contest, in which it was perfectly clear there was nothing to be gained. One fact, with respect to that examination, he would call their attention to—on one occasion his Learned Friend, whose assistance he (Mr. Thesiger) then had, so contrary to all the rules of evidence was the ex amination, was obliged to interfere, a circumstance he was happy to say extremely unusual in other Courts, and point out to the Learned Cross-exa miner, that he was not taking exactly the legal course that ought to be adopted. He found that Gentleman putting things into the poor woman's mouth that had never occurred, merely to entrap her. Of the same character were the ob servations made by him upon a word used by her, and com mon and intelligible to persons in her class of life, he meant the word "conditions" of whi c h th e L earne d Gentleman affected ignorance. That would give the Jury an idea of the fairness of the mode of examination pursued. When, however, he (Mr. Thesiger) had adverted to the mode of inquiry pursued, he was satisfied, that much of his Learned Friend's arguments, would entirely fail, and that they must come back to that which was the only ground on which their judgment could be demanded, namely, whether or no, Mr. Berkeley and his party, on the 6th July, did or did not make a promise to Mrs. Virrier, on behalf of her husband, which she has alleged they did. And whether Mr. Berke ley did or did not, on parting shake hands with her and put into it a sovereign, which she also alleged he did, and which Mr. Berkeley denied. In the first place, he (Mr. Thesiger) complained of the feeling, for Mr. Berkeley said it was a matter of feeling, which had been adopted in the case His Learned Friend had told them that four witnesses had been exa mined, Mrs. Virrier, her husband, Mrs. Hazard, and Sarah Anne Heyward—they all confirmed one another with regard to the main part of the story, namely, as to the 6/. and the sovereign. What had the other party done ? Indicted all of them, so that when he called before them, as he most undoubtedly would, Mrs. Hazard and Sarah Hayward, the daughter, his Learned Friend might be able to ask them, and to stigmatize them with the question— " Are not you the subjects of indictments for pejury ?" With the exception of what had been said by Mr. Berkeley, with respect to the sovereign, and Mr. Carlisle with re spect to the 61. ; all that had been said by the other wit nesses was perfectly reconcileable with the evidence given by the defendant on the subject. Now, the law required that every person indicted for perjury must have the testi mony of two persons to convict him ; that been held not to mean two viva voce living witnesses, but one and each confirmatory, documentary, or other evidence as would fully corroborate it. The Jury would recollect the manner in which the gentle men who had been before them had given their evidence— one had heard nothing, and the other could recollect no. thing ; so that i n f ac t, as t h e matter stood, i t was merely oath against oath. There were the oaths of Mr. Berkeley and Mr. Carlisle against those of the witnesses who were examined before the Committee. Then look at the manner in which the case had been got up. Before the Com mittee there were four witnesses examined, amongst whom were Mrs. Virrier and her husband. They were now in dicted, so that he was left with only the other two witnesses, and in order to disqualify them—for the purpose of pre prejudicing them in the eyes of the Jury—for the purpose of throwing discredit upon their testimony, they also had been indicted for perjury. Notwithstanding all that, he would be able to defend the unfortunate, humble woman who was his client, and shield her from being stigmatized as a perjurer —he had materials enough to shield her from being so branded. He perfectly agreed with his Learned Friend that it was very base conduct in any one to use the funds of a charity for political purposes, no conduct could be more deserving of every man's reprobation ; that charge formed a part of the pre sent case—a necessary part of it, and therefore the case became very important. His Learned Friend had insinu ated, not only that those witnesses had gone before the Committee with the intention of perjuring themselves, in revenge for some fancied slight ; but he had also had the hardihood of insinuating that they had been suborned to that perjury by the agents of the opposite party. That was a grave charge, yet his Learned Friend had been in structed to lay it before the Jury ; for he said that it was not difficult to get persons in the station of life in which the defendant lived to swear anything. That was imputing the subornation of perjury to some one, and it was pretty plain in wh a t quar t er i t was intended that it should rest. y His duty therefore was not merely to defend his immediate client, b u t h e was b ound to defend those other objects attack who had been so unfairly and improperly brought b e f ore t h e j ury without any means so being afforded them of making any defence. Now when they found the party calling itself Liberal, in delibe rate publications—in writings which must have cost much study, and therefore must have been matter of deliberate thought —when they found that this party put forth to the freemen deliberate statements that the charitable funds were in the hands of those to whom a Li beral vote would be a recommendation_whe n this was put forth in their Newspaper, and dinned into the ears of the poor electors, by means of the 120,000 pamphlets. surely it was no violent presumption that the same party, in the heat of a canvass, should give tittaranea to what was in their thoughts, and tell tlae poor electors that a Liberal vote would not ho forgotten at Christnrws, when these Liberal gentlemen were disposing of the charity. It was not a very violent presumption to s uppose that when in the heat of the canva i s these Trustees should 1141 out such a lure for peer freemen. The canvas% was not that In L of Mr, tierkeley, it was th a t o f the Asaociation—t heral A ssoc i at i on . M r. Il erlioley was as nothin6- n their hands, he was a mew automaton, 0 ;7,u was d ragged i about q any way they pleitaed. There was in Bristol a Liberal #ssoci*ip,9, 4 There was a IlgArd of Charity Trustees, and there was an Election Committee of the Liberal Association, and strange to say, the Chair of the whole three was filled by one man Mr Carlisle filled the chairs of the whole of them. Here they had upon the canvass the Chairman of the Association, but he was also the Chairmanof the Charities ; they had several other trustees along with him, but not a word ever drops from the lip s o f any o f t h em w i th respect to the Charity Fun d s o rits distributi on . N o, even w h en some of the electors f orgo t . themselve s so f ar as to a ll u d e to i t, the i nd i gnant v i rtue o f the canvassers was roused, and they did what—referred them to the tracts. Those tracts would be laid before the Jury, and they would judge how far the indignant virtue went. They said that formerly the Trust Funds had been wastefully and shamefully misapplied by the Tories, but things are all altered now. Reform has gene through the land—we are virtuous—do not speak to us of such doings —our indignant virtue is such, that a vote on our side, so far from boing considered as a claim upon us for the charity funds, will be almost a bar to any poor elector, but look at the tracts." In the news paper written by Somerton,' or some one else, it was loudly stated that eighteen out of the twenty-one trustees were belonging to the thorough Liberal party, and that the charity funds would not be applied to reward a Tory vote. What, did that mean, if it did not me an th a t votes on t h e Lib era l side would be rewarded ? His Learned Friend, no doubt, would say this was put forth on the 21st July, fifteen days after the canvass ; but did it not show what was in the mind when they saw such a paragraph in a delibe rate publication ? and was it too much to suppose that while it was rankling in the minds of these . trustees, it should come out w hil e th ere was a prospect o f its gaining a vote for their party . .? Then what was the time selected for the publication and distribution of the 120,000 tracts. It was denied that they were put forth for elec tion purposes, but so ridiculous, such a flimsy denial he had never seen put before a Jury in the whole course of his experience. They were published upon the eve of an election, and it was carefully stated is them that the vast majority of the trustees were Liberals, and that they had the means of rewarding upwards of 400 electors according to their pleasure, and stated that never in future would the 61. be given in the proportion of 40 Tory votes to one Liberal. It would be idle in him, it would be a n ins u lt t o t h e common sense o f the Jury to contend for a moment that they were not put forth for a political purpose, and for the purposes of the election. It was impossible to put any other colour upon these pamphletst han pink. It had been his duty to inquire into the previous character of Mr. Berkeley. It was a question of character altogether, and he had a perfect right to make such inquiries. They had heard the account given by Mr. Berkeley of his former life, and it was not exactly one which they would be well pleased to hear of one nearly related to a noble family--e gentleman, or of one who had attained the high honour of being a representative in Parliament. The evidence of the other witnesses he would leave in their hands, merely remarking that not one of them swore positively ; that there was confusion amongst them ex cept in one thing, and that was, that Mr. Berkeley did shake hands with Mrs. Virrier. The case he had tai lay before them would entirely controvert that of the prosecution, and it would be proved by wit nesses, whose character would bear a strict investiga tion. He thanked God they were now before a tribunal where impartial justice would be done—where no political feeling would enter into the question—and where no jea lousy would await the result. He thanked God that they were now before a jury of the country, for no one could find fault with the judgment they came to. He would call before them the two parties who had been examined before the Committee, and they would confidently repeat the statements made by them there. Most providentially, however, he would be enabled to confirm the testi mony by that of a witness who ;seemed to have been mercifully sent for the protection of the innocent, At the time in question the defendant had in her service a young girl named Mary Young. She happened to be in the cellar when the canvassers called, and overheard all the cow versation. At the time when the defendant gave evi dence before the Committee the girl had left her service, and as there were so many to confirm her, but espe cially as they were unaware of the little girl's know ledge, no exertion was made to get her for the purposes of the Committee. In October last she returned to the service of the defendant, and hearing her speak of the approaching trial, which naturally must have, formed a frequent topic of conversation, the young girl for the first time told that she had been a listener to the conversa tion, and therefore she was an important witness. She would be produced—she would give her testimony,and be subject to the searching cross-examination of his Learned Friend, and from her demeanour the Jury would judge of the value of her testimony. He had other two witnesses to call before them, They had heard that Mr. Carlisle had an almost stentorian voice, and that he could not modulate it to the tones of a sucking dove. It was lucky in the present case, that it was so because lie wag now enabled to produce two witnesses who were in the neighbourhood at the time of the transaction, and who from the want of thought of Mr. Carlisle, or from the impossi bility of subduing his stentorian voice, heard him make the promise of the six pounds, as alleged by Mrs. Vir rier. That was the case he intended to lay before them on the part of the defendant. He meant to say that it was true the Charity Trustees had shamefully and disgracefully abused their trust, and had perverted the funds entrusted to them to political purposes ; that upon the occasion referred to, they did endeavour to prevail upon a person to hold fast in the intention to give their party a vote by the promise of the 61. and that their candidate had then and there sealed the bond by that shake of the hand and the deposit of the sovereign as deposed to by Mrs. Virrier. Not one of the witnesses, except Mr. Berke ley swore positively that he had not so deposited the sove reign, while Mrs. Virrier was equally positive on the other side. It was for the Jury to judge of the probability of the cases made out by one party and the other, and he was satisfied that they would give their verdict according to the weight of evidence, and not accordi ng to the weight of station of the parties. He was satisfied that they, holding the scales of justice between ti tle parties, would see good caus e t o a ll ow hi s client to 'go from th a t Court without di sgrace , w i t h out the brar;(i of perjurer being in delibly sta mpe d aga i nst her na7,e. Sarah Ann Hayward, e!'.amined by Mr. TALBOT—Wasthe daught er o f Mr. Virrier,, w h o in July, 1837, lived in the Adam and E v- a-passage, and carried on the business of newsvender there. Recollected the canvassing party com ing round. Mrs. Virrier came to say they wer e cowing' when Mr. Virrier refused to see them, and we - nt up stairs. After Mr.Virrier went up stairs Carlisle:came and knockedat the door. Mrs. Virrier went out and spoke to him. Witness remained in the sitting room. She heard Mr. Carlisle ask if her father was at home, to which her mother said be was not. Her mother said her father intended to vote on e and one ; to which Mr. Carlisle replied, he would act like a sensible man, and bo should have the 61. at Christmas- Mr. Berkeley was then introduced to her mother ; upon which he s h oo k b ands with her, and said something to ber in an under voice, which witness could not hear. Alter wards Mr. C ar li s l e aga i n said he would give him the , if he voted as his wife had st a t e d. S omething was sal; about " deserving men," but witness could not catch all that was said. Cress-examined by Mr. CROWDER—Thought she bad said she heard the word deserving before the Committee of the House of Commons, but would not say positively Thought the conversation lasted about ten miautes vii,t h her m o th er an d M r. Carlisle. Mr. Berkeley nook beau° with witne ss ' s mot h er, but could n tell vi be : they h e t h an k e d her. Mr. Virrierot was vritne ss, - step-father, He had been in P'aol several times, and also through the Insolvent, Debtor's Court. Witness bad been with Mrs. Bentson, a miP.Mer. Since then she bad been living with her mother. Came up on the same coach with the other witnesses to give evidence before the Com mHiattdeen.eSvear b Saw A e l e r n . Ht there More Believedt afortnig fortnight h b ea ef mar e that time. anything a b out t h e sovereign before she went other there.bad Thought it was a d ay or two before they came to Loudon that she h ear d h er mother speak about it. Her father was been th ere b e f ort. Her mother had not told her not in the room when witness and her mother was ex amined. Recollected her mother saying Mr. Berkeley had. given her a sovereign ; but did not recollect exactly 411 that took place, When the canvassing party departed, Mrs. Hazard left, and witness's mother told her to go uP stairs and tell Virrier to come down. Knew Mr. Carlisle well, he bought newspapers from them. Heard Mr. Car lisle say to her mother, I believe your husband's a freeman, to which her mother replied that he was. After witness Was examined in London she returned to Bristol, and had resided with her mother ever since. Was not aws: r e of her mother having any money except what had been got by the Newspaper business. Shortly after the cP.-avassing com menced, Mrs. Hazard came to live at IPI r mother's house, and was residing there when they ca;ne to London to be NSirh.eHdiadzanrodt,hwinhgo © ;he was there ; she was By the CouaT—Mrs4 Halarsda l e i x , a in m g in w e i d th . mother's ho use when Mr. Berkeley called. w so a l s ici n to o r t or Tiringa cco u a n t t a h n e t r . By the Jury—.. Knew Mr. Somerton. He was with Mr. Berkeley when be called. Su . sa " 4ll Hazard-, examined by M r . THESSIGER---WAS marrleci s and Eyed at Bedminster. Her husband was at one time in the Navy, but had since writ ten for gentlemen. Recollected being at Vit-rier's on the.. t' ay Mr. B er k e l ey ' s canvass i ng party arrived. She had been there to buy a newspaper. Heard Mr. Carlisle as,s Mrs. Virrier who her husband was going to vote for ; and upon her stating one and one, be saii.l he would act like a sposihle man. Witness heard something said about money N. being promised at Christina* last. Saw Mr. Berkeley